Hard to believe he would be there at all, were his research so far a failure.

Well performed research is never a failure. Even if the results are negative or unwanted, they are still of value and should be reported at meetings and in the literature. This helps prevent other researchers from repeating errors and going down blind alleys. It may also give others insight and lead to new discoveries.

I am often puzzled that Bill Gates support for LENR, if it exists, should be secret. Why? I am sure Mr. Gates can withstand criticism from mainline scientists, if that is the concern. And he already gets thousands of requests for his staff to screen so it can't be to avoid more LENR proposals. What's the current conspiracy theory that explains why Bill Gates would be secretive, had he decided to support Duncan or anyone else looking at LENR.

I've seen a slide from Michael McKubre about what should be done on LENR (and which says we are far).

What I would like for people I exchange with is a diverse collection of "experimental plan" dedicated to industry and academic labs of various kind.

When you met a small company in hightech, a local academic lab in a dynamic zone, working in domain like nanotech, accumulators, engines, nuclear science, renewable, I would like to send them a handful of proposal papers saying that

"according to this old LENR experimenter" a good research plan could be "analyse this and that paper" then "try to reproduce this and that experiment" "then when it works experiment this and that new idea" to gather data and why not go to "the explanation".

Personally I'm attracted by Ed Storms approach, thus to PdD wet cells then dry gas permeation once it works, using modern instruments like used in accumulator research and nanotech, but i'm not competent enough to gather the reference papers, guess which kind of corporate lab would be best, guess the costs and requirements.

I know Storms approach is not well received by most, but when I real all critics on all theory, the conclusion is that there is no theory, no hope, no future. I suspect, from experimental results, this position is a bit exaggerated.

David J. Nagel introduced keynote speaker Tom Darden at the 21st International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. He spoke about “group-think” and urged scientists to keep open minds and reject conformity thinking, going through examples of “cultural group-think” in American society, and referenced the last US election. He wants to see the mainstream open up to scientific papers and he is seeking to engage the whole of science in this important field. “Humanity needs for us to succeed,” he ended.

One quote that suprise me from Mike McKubre :

Mike McKubre wrote:

“At the same time, cold fusion is reproduced somewhere on the planet every day. Verification has already happened. But self-censorship is a problem in the CMNS field. Are we guarding our secrets for fear that someone else might take credit? Yes.”

Interesting evocation of confirmed results in PdD/LiOD

Mizuno results were presented by Jed Rothwell "He reported 20-40 Watts from a glow discharge set-up which uses air-flow calorimetry as other calorimetries interfered with the experiment. ".

Miley have presented his results with nanoparticles (PdZrO2) over 6 month...

Robert Duncan was there, and introduce Akito Takahashi presented work on some poweder (Pd Ni ZrO2)...

Personally I wonder wether the Zuppero theory may be a missing link for Storms theory. "Taking two particles, each has a potential. At some point when they are a particular distance, they begin to couple, and an “big” electron is ejected out of the system leaving the reactant in a low-energy state. "... maybe .

Monday, June 4: 1st day ICCF21 Fort Collins Colorado

This first day began with an introduction by David Nagel, who put this conference back in relation to the previous 20 conferences. ICCF21 is in the middle of previous conferences with 173 participants.

Tom Darden : Creator of Industrial Heat recalled that he had come three years ago to the Padua conference. He explained that he was doing what he was doing, that is, supporting the Cold Fusion because of the consequences of the LENRs which should in particular not create pollution. For 6 years they have been helping laboratories to achieve a reproducible experience by traditional laboratories.

Michael McKubre , retired from SRI did a "Technical Perspective". He recalled that he had worked three years with Martin Fleischmann in Southampton after his thesis. It was because he knew him that from the beginning he started cold fusion, especially since he was already working on deuterium in palladium. He made a reminder of what he knew:

Deuterium loading by measuring the resistance of the electrode,

The measurement of tritium and helium-3

The measurement of helium-4

He explained that he can not measure everything at the same time during an experiment, so choices must be made. He explained that there were 5 actions: Verification - Correlation - Replication - Demonstration - Use. For him, since 1992 the proof of the reality of the cold fusion had been made in particular by Mel Miles who had shown the correlation between heat and helium production.

Dennis Letts and Dennis Cravens , "Building and testing at high temperature Seebeck calorimeter". They showed the details of their air-cooled Seebeck calorimeter in which they discharge with 500 volts and 200mA under a pressure of 10 Torr deuterium. They regularly obtained heat excesses of 5 watts. In their experiment, they use an anode of molybdenum and as cathode a deposit of 7um of palladium on the inside of the tube. The time constant of the calorimeter is 2h 30.

Mizuno ,: "Glow discharge experiments". The presentation was made by Jed Rothwell because Mizuno did not come. In his experience, he made plasma discharges to deposit nickel and palladium. It measures the heat produced with cooling with a flow of air. He has placed in his calorimeter two identical reactors, one of which is blank. In the first experiments, he obtained a COP of 2. With a new method, he has only 10 to 30 Watts of excess heat.

George Miley : "Progress in Cluste Enabled LENR". His work is financially supported by Industrial Heat. He continued on the track he had opened by doing multi-layer Ni-Pd. He thinks that defects are created because of the stress between two materials. For this he worked with a Pd-ZrO2 system manufactured by "arc melting" and then reduced to powder by "ball milling". All experiments with Pd-ZrO2 produced heat excesses. They experimented at room temperature loading and unloading deuterium into the powder. There is more heat charging than unloading. They also added inside the CR39 cell to detect the production of neutrons, and indeed they were observed. In the future, they will work at higher temperatures.

Takahashi : "Research Status of Nano-Metal Hydrogen Energy" This presentation is the first of three presentations that are the results of a collaboration between Nissan, Technova and four universities under the NEDO. The experiments were made with Pd-Ni-ZrO2 and Ni-Cu-ZrO2 alloys. He recalled his theory that supposes that 4 deuterium merge simultaneously in a tetrahedral structure. In a calorimeter operating with an oil cooling. They introduce hydrogen or deuterium at a pressure of 1 to 10 atmospheres. The experiments range from ambient to 500 ° C.The excess heat observed is of the order of 5 Watts with 100g of powder. Differential Calorimetry measurements show that there is an optimum around 400 ° C. They also noticed that the excess heat increases after a re-oxidation of the powder made by melt spinning and followed by a first oxidation.

Iwamura : "Anomalous Heat Effects Induced by Metal Nanocomposites and Hydrogen Gas". This project is part of the NEDO from October 2015 to October 2017. The best results are 8 Watts. They noticed that the system only works with alloys. The Pd-ZrO2 system does not work.One way of understanding is to think that for there to be excess heat, there must be gaps in the metal. This happens when there is an interface that produces stress and therefore gaps. With palladium alone, there are no constraints, so heat to at least 800 ° C to create these gaps. They also observed heat burst correlated with pressure increase.

Hioki ; "XRD and XAFS Analysis for Metal Nanocomposites Used in Anomalous Heat Effect Experiments". 16 collaborative experiments were performed with the same materials as those described by the other two authors. He then spoke of mesoporous zeolite type materials in which palladium nano grains are introduced. They obtained an excess of 10 Watts for 45 days.

Peter Hagelstein : "Phonon Mediated Excitation Transfer Nuclear Involving Excitation". He picked up on what he said the day before by showing that collimated X-rays can be produced.

Vladimir Vysotskii : "Using the Method of Coherent Correlated States for Realization of Nuclear Interaction of Slow Particles with Crystals and Molecules". He showed that LENR-type reactions occur through an effect of correlated states that lower the Coulomb barrier.

Zuppero and Dolan : "Electron Quasiparticle Catalysis of Nuclear Reactions". They showed that in some chemical reactions an electron is emitted with the energy of the reaction. This idea was developed for LENR type reactions. According to them, they manage to explain all the observations.

Norman Cook : "The Renaissance in Nuclear PhysicsLENR and Transmutations". He developed the problem of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle that does not apply in the kernel. He criticized the Copenhagen school for interpreting this principle of uncertainty.

I am often puzzled that Bill Gates support for LENR, if it exists, should be secret. Why? I am sure Mr. Gates can withstand criticism from mainline scientists, if that is the concern. And he already gets thousands of requests for his staff to screen so it can't be to avoid more LENR proposals. What's the current conspiracy theory that explains why Bill Gates would be secretive, had he decided to support Duncan or anyone else looking at LENR.

SOT,

There is no current conspiracy theory, and I do not believe there was one when this was first reported 2 years ago. BTW, not *everything* revolving around LENR is spun into a conspiracy as you try to portray. Maybe the Rossi believers still resort to that out of necessity, but mainstream LENR research stands on it's own merits. It does not need propping up with conspiracies.

That said, it probably is Gates signature, and someone other than him probably felt the need to block it. Maybe it was someone from Seashore Research, or maybe some university secretary who felt it was prudent. Who knows and who cares?

If you want to continue on with this, bring it over to the Playground.

IH is well represented at Ft. Collins. I see Miley and the IH University of Illinois UC Lab Team, Letts and Bob Higgins. Any others from IH I missed? So far Miley, and Letts are reporting excess heat. If that holds up to scrutiny, IH will be well rewarded eventually.

After Rossi ran him through the mud at Doral, Darden also must be enjoying working with true professionals. Not a worry about being ripped off...how refreshing! Darden deserves cudos for sticking with LENR after what he had to go through. Most others would have taken their money elsewhere and lick their wounds.

Maybe so but Mr. Darden still has plenty to worry about. Nobody he supports has yet shown persuasively that they have the goods. He could be following one failure with many more. His problem I guess, depending on who is actually funding the ventures.

Quote

Darden deserves cudos for sticking with LENR after what he had to go through. Most others would have taken their money elsewhere and lick their wounds.

I think that completely misses the point. Darden failed to vet Rossi properly despite the large number of internet and other resources which could have helped him. What he needed to do next was to review all his projects and to ask reliable (read main line scientists) about how to test those. Not whether or not to fund them but how to properly test them. There is no evidence he has done that.

Quote

I wish he, Dewey and the IH team the best.

Me too. And I suspect they will need more than wishes to succeed, if history is any sort of guide.

I looked on LENR-CANR, and I see neither this Edward Beiting, or "The Aerospace Corporation" he is a Senior Scientist of, linked to LENR before this. Am I wrong? If not, do you know what attracted him to start experimenting with LENR?

That aside, it is an interesting connection, as Beitings employer "The Aerospace Corporation" does some work for NASA, along with some other space related agencies. And we also know -thanks to Ahlfors investigative skills, that NASA is now coordinating with GEC/JWK, and the former talent of SPAWAR. It is also a well established fact that NASA has been involved with CF/LENR since FP's time.

On a slightly different, but related matter...in my search of your library just now, I also stumbled upon this: http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/NiedraJMreplicatio.pdf It caught my attention because last year there was a discussion about NASA's "success" in replicating Randy Mills early work, and someone claimed that was untrue. That NASA did not replicate, and were not successful. Anyway, the summary says they (NASA) were successful.

I can't wait to read the full report listed at the end of the abstract.

Same here. The first thing that strikes me is that they calibrate with nitrogen in both cells and then compare a nitrogen filled cell with a hydrogen filled cell during their active run. Hopefully, they make their calibration method more clear in the full paper.

Quote

In my opinion, this is one of the best reports in the history of cold fusion. Great calorimetry -- IRREFUTABLE results.

Do you derive this opinion solely from that abstract?

Quote

I suggest you wait until you read the papers from the people I.H. are supporting before you decide whether they have the goods or not.

Sure. But you must forgive me if I do not simply take your word for it.